Café Society (2016) User Reviews (216)

A life unexamined is not worth living...and a life examined is no bargain.

[blanche-2 · 6/10 · 9 January 2017]

Leave it to Woody Allen to add that ending to a quote by Socrates.

Woody Allen is so prolific that he can't possibly knock one out of the park every time. Though "Cafe Society" has a bittersweet, thoughtful quality about it, it's not one of his best.

Jesse Eisenberg is the Woody character, Bobby, who moves to LA from the Bronx in the 1930s and drops in on his highly successful agent uncle, Phil Stern (Steve Carrell). Bobby has only been trying to see him for three weeks, but Uncle Phil finally comes through. He has Bobby work for him doing errands until he can steer him toward something better. He also asks his secretary Vonnie (Kristen Stewart) to show Bobby around.

Bobby falls for Vonnie immediately, but unbeknownst to him, she's having an affair with his uncle, who is married. Phil decides he can't leave his wife and breaks it off with her, and she and Bobby wind up falling in love. But later, it falls to Vonnie to make a choice.

Cafe Society is a little on the slow side - the acting is good, there are a few jokes, it's historically accurate (I'm always looking for films about old Hollywood to goof up like Barton Fink), and the photography and fashions are beautiful.

Woody is talking here about the road not taken and showing us two people who think about that other road often. Of course there's no answer, but it is something we all wonder about especially as we age.

I just don't think the story was tight enough - it seemed to meander.

I'm not familiar with Kristen Stewart. She has a special beauty and a nice presence and fit into the film well. Eisenberg, like most actors doing the Woody character in Woody films, takes on some of Allen's inflections. He's likable. Steve Carrell's role does not play to his strengths but he pulls it off. Someone on this board complained about Bobby's parents. I thought Jeanie Berlin, whom I haven't seen in years, was terrific and gave a very realistic performance.

Not a heck of a lot goes on in this film - it's not serious like Crimes and Misdemeanors and it's not Bullets Over Broadway, which was a comedy with serious undertones about art. I think here Allen making a choice about which it would be may have been a good idea.

Beautiful but unsatisfying

[TheLittleSongbird · 6/10 · 7 October 2016]

Woody Allen often is an interesting and insightful directors, whose films regardless of how they come off overall look great, have great soundtracks and he often knows how to get strong performances out of actors, at his best his writing was a fine mix of the hilarious, the poignantly dramatic and the thought-provoking.

'Café Society' is not one of his best films. Allen's glory days were in the late 60s through to the early 90s, with the 70s and 80s (which saw masterpieces like 'Annie Hall', 'Crimes and Misdemeanours' and 'Manhattan' for example) being particularly good decades. From mid-90s onwards he became hit and miss, with the odd gem like 'Midnight in Paris' and 'Blue Jasmine' but generally his glory days are long gone.

As far as his films from the 2010s decade go, 'Midnight in Paris' and 'Blue Jasmine' are vastly superior but 'Café Society' does fare better than 'To Rome With Love' and 'You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger'. 'Café Society' is not a great film, but is not a poor one, generally Allen has done worse (almost all of them being in the last twenty years or so) but it really isn't one of his better films.

Its best asset is the magnificent cinematography, every shot takes the breath away and complements the also spot-on and very handsomely produced 30s period detail perfectly. The soundtrack also is an ideal fit, giving a real sense of period as well as being a wonderful soundtrack on its own. There are shades of prime-Allen writing, there are some very funny moments, some touching ones and it does evoke thought afterwards, Allen's themes done in an insightful way.

The story is simple but rarely dull, it is a long way from perfect as will be detailed later on in the review but it did maintain interest. It's nicely directed by Allen. Performances vary. Blake Lively is positively luminous and Steve Carrell shows that he is adept at comedy and drama in a role that requires both extremes. Was very pleasantly surprised by Kristen Stewart, she can not do much for me but this is proof that with good material she can be good, the role could easily have been hardly one at all but Stewart does make the role more interesting than he deserved to be.

Jesse Eisenberg didn't work for me, he just plays a younger Woody Allen alter ego and it just comes off as a bad impersonation without being either funny or charming, instead it's annoying and the neuroses are overdone. Corey Stoll also feels very out of place, didn't buy him for a minute as a mobster, the role didn't suit him in the first place and it didn't fit within the period.

On top of this, the script and story execution aren't perfect. Mostly the script is very enjoyable but some jokes, especially the bad-taste and insensitive poking fun at Jews, do fall flat. Allen's narration is irritating, overused and over-explanatory, more show and less tell please Allen, consequently giving 'Café Society' an overwritten feel. The story does suffer from too much crammed in and sketchily developed characters (making the central relationships not quite as convincing as they ought to have been), and while there was no problem with a more morose at the end the ending just felt too inconclusive and gave the sense that Allen was indecisive as to how to finish the film.

In conclusion, looks beautiful and has some enjoyable things but somewhat unsatisfying. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Woody as we know him

[rubenm · 7/10 · 4 June 2016]

For me, seeing a Woody Allen movie is like spending an evening with an old friend. It's something to look forward to, because you know each other well and the two of you go back a long time. You know what the conversation topics are going to be, because he has his favourite subjects and lately he seldom talks about anything else. But that's alright, because he knows a lot about those things and is an expert in making nice conversation. Some evenings you spend together are more memorable than others, but it's always nice to see each other.

Seeing Café Society was no exception. This was Woody Allen as we know him: jazz music, New York, a socially awkward lead character, jokes about being Jewish, complicated love affairs - all those typical elements were there. The story is not even the most important part of the movie - it's about a love triangle set in 1930's Hollywood and New York, and about people betraying their own ideals only because they get older. It's entertaining, intelligent and elegant cinema.

During the years, Woody Allen seems to have perfected his style. He is like a chef with a legendary signature dish: the taste hardly varies, but it's always delicious.

Jesse Eisenberg, playing the classic Woody part, and Kristen Stewart as his love interest are adequate. They don't stand out as Cate Blanchett did in Blue Jasmine, but are quite believable as two lovers who ultimately marry the wrong partner. The thirties setting is nice: the way Allen and his cinematographer capture the elegance of the period is a joy to watch.

It was a very romantic look at a moment in time.

[subxerogravity · 7/10 · 18 July 2016]

I myself am a sucker for a movie that gives a take on old school Hollywood and Woody Allen did a beautiful job with Cafe Society.

The cinematography on this one did a great job of capturing the feel of 1930s California and New York city. I can't get over how beautiful this thing was shot. A knock out combination of lights setting and music to bring out the mood.

And the jazz numbers that lace this flick did just that for setting that beautiful tone

Jesse Eisenberg started off a little too much Woody Allen at first (one particular scene in the beginning that acts like a hilarious sketch routine, where Jesse's character Bobby buys a hooker). It did get some getting use to, before it became his own thing.

Corey Stoll's character Ben, a though Jew who becomes a night club owner, whole involvement in the film taste like Scorsese light, which only made it even that more interesting.

It's a good Woody Allen comedy,but They are all good to me. If you like one you like them all (but I'm more partial to the ones he does not star in, like this one), and it's super impressive he does one of these on annual basis and he's able keep the quality constant.

It'a funny film with laugh out loud moments, and very crafty narrative narrated by Allen himself. This movie is just another love letter with the city he loves (and a thoughtful P.S you're OK too California), and makes Woody feel like such a helpless romantic, but that's what makes the movie so good to watch.

http://cinemagardens.com/?p=55

Regular but cute...

[RosanaBotafogo · 7/10 · 22 February 2021]

I liked it, fun, adorable... I found the rhythm a little slow, the narration always helps, not to get lost in space time, but the story could captivate more, a little dragged, but cute, it lacked a little bit of chemistry, despite being a fan of the two... Jesse Eisenberg s2 Kristen...

Allen's poorer tendencies harm what could have been a very good film

[zetes · 6/10 · 31 July 2016]

Pretty typical for current-period Woody Allen, Café Society feels rushed and incomplete. It also feels like it could have been one of his best had it went through a couple of revisions. Or not been a Woody Allen movie. Jesse Eisenberg might have been excellent in the lead had he not been saddled with the having to impersonate Allen thing. That, along with some very clunky dialogue, especially in the first half, harmed the movie irreparably for me. Too bad, because there's a lot of great stuff here. The story is very good, and it actually has some nice emotion behind it. Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart are wonderful together, and the romance is deeply felt. The basic story is a love triangle with Eisenberg and Steve Carell, his uncle, both falling in love with Stewart, Carell's secretary. The setting is 1930s Hollywood, at least in the first half. The Hollywood setting is a bit of a tease, though, since it leads to little but uninteresting name dropping (which is actually plot relevant, but gets annoying pretty quickly). The second half, which takes place in New York City, is much better, I think. Blake Lively may have given my favorite performance in the film. Stewart is in fine form, though. Really luminous.

A painting... but

[charliemouse-06733 · 6/10 · 12 May 2019]

Really nice pic of the thirties. Beautiful paintings but... something is missing the creepy family deserved more... They were funny but not important enough it seems

Café Society

[abouhelier-r · 8/10 · 15 May 2016]

Set in the 1930s, a young Bronx native moves to Hollywood where he falls in love with the secretary of his powerful uncle, an agent to the stars. after returning to New York he is swept up in the vibrant world of high society nightclub life.

Café Society opened this year Cannes Film Festival and is the latest film directed by Woody Allen. It's a story that mixes various parts of the Allen back catalogue to varying degrees of success. A film that wants more than anything to entertain. In many ways Café Society could be said to restate almost all of the key ideas and themes of Woody Allen's films in one way or another: life, chance, fate, love and guilt.

It also comes from the movie providing the performances. Jesse Eisenberg is so seamlessly cast as the prototypical Allen protagonist that when the film shift from Allen's voice over to Bobby speaking it feels continuous. Bobby's broken heart has caused him to undergo a Bogartian growing up: from a gauche boy to a mature disillusioned man, trapped in the wrong marriage. Moreover, Kristen Stewart sad eyes, throaty delivery and slightly heartbreaking aura make her almost interesting, ad an easy chemistry between her and her third-time co-star Jesse Eisenberg and he fits perfectly into his role while she simply overflows the screen.

But if Café Society is Allen quoting Allen, sometimes literally, at least he's quoting his better bits. Surprise comes from the movie providing the honeyed cinematography by V. Storaro which uses silhouette, graphic compositions and glowing close ups in an often genuinely breathtaking manner. "Life is comedy, but it's one written by a sadistic comedy writer" says Bobby. The comedy writer Allen on display here is more wistful and nostalgic for the very concept of unfulfilled true love, for the heyday of the Hollywood star system, for a New-York of gangsters and back alley craps game and stolen kisses at dawn in Central Park. And all of that nostalgia is okay. Because we were getting pretty nostalgic for the good odd days of warm, witty, fond and funny Woody Allen too.

Make no mistake Café Society is still late-period Allen. Men are described in terms of their characters and complications, while women are still described in terms of their beauty and their effect on said men. When Blake Lively's character motherhood becomes the butt of an exchange between two men, about how women who become mothers devote way too much time to their children (and ultimately not enough to their husband); it's a sour note that reminds us that Bad Allen is always there, underneath.

Overall, this film is Woody Allen's most charming film since Midnight in Paris and maybe most beautiful to look at, maybe ever. It's a little pretty little reminder of what once was

Generic plot paired with pleasing visuals, Cafe Society falls right in the middle.

[yuschaa · 6/10 · 13 September 2016]

Set in the 1930s, Cafe Society is another insight at the lives of white people in America. A man living in New York (somehow) has to move to Los Angeles to pursue job opportunities from his uncle. There, he met a stunning young woman who captivated him. Emotions starts to ensue when he learns that the woman will change the course of his life forever.

2000s Woody Allen films are definitely a hit or a miss, and this movie falls just right in the middle. The plot was very much generic, and there are severe lack of likable characters. Most of the characters did some questionable things and done nothing to prove themselves that they are redeemable by the end of the movie. Several talents were tragically wasted too, like Blake Lively and Steve Carrell.

There are aspects in the movie stood out better than the rest, such as tonal consistency, the 1930s aesthetic, and the jazz-dominated scoring. The narration by the director himself may add nothing of importance to the narrative, but it helps reinforcing the classic style the movie intends to create.

You may love this movie to death or hate it. For me it just sits right there: forgettable plot, but mesmerizing visuals.

One of Woody Allen's weaker projects

[ybenhayun · 5/10 · 23 July 2016]

There is a lot going against this movie. Jesse Eisenberg's character comes off as a complete asshole within 10 minutes of the film, thanks to a really terrible scene between him and a Jewish hooker. None of the humor in that scene landed, which just made the situation really sad and uncomfortable to watch, and then kind of difficult to root for Eisenberg at all after that. Steve Carell isn't bad by any means, but he seems incredibly miscast in a role like this (not to say that he can't act in roles that are more serious, but this Hollywood film executive didn't really suit him). Both of the Dorfman parents come off as really awkward on screen and thus kill any of the jokes that they're meant to deliver. The only actor that gives a notable performance in this movie is Corey Stoll as the brother, but it's not enough. Kristin Stewart was mostly fine, but occasionally started picking up some of her infamous Kristin Stewartisms throughout. Carell and Eisenberg become really close out of nowhere, both of the couples' relationships are sped up by Woody Allen's narration (which doesn't really add anything to this film), and this movie is only 90 minutes long, so I feel as if they could have definitely spent more time with all of these relationships, instead of just having Woody tell us what was happening. And on top of all of this, while this is a beautiful film to look at, there is nothing new in this movie. It's another Woody Allen movie with the same romances and love triangles centered around white people who like jazz with a pretty inconclusive and unsatisfying ending.

Solid Late-Period Woody

[bkrauser-81-311064 · 8/10 · 10 August 2016]

Director/writer Woody Allen's latest film can be seen as one of his most personal films to date. Dialed to the bright, nostalgic feel of Radio Days (1987), Cafe Society nevertheless reels from an undercurrent of existential authenticity a la Husbands and Wives (1992) poetically and often ruefully addressing the feeling of having lost the road not taken.

Our protagonist is young up-and-comer Bobby Dorfman (Eisenberg), a New Yorker, whose dreams of making it in Hollywood rests uneasily over some very scrawny shoulders. At first he's aided by his Uncle Phil (Carell), an agent and powerhouse among the coastal elite. He sets him up as an assistant and script-reader. Bobby's family dutifully keeps tabs on him back in New York as he climbs the slippery ladder of Hollywood's well-to-do, finding friends in Steve (Schneider) and Rad Taylor (Posey) who have a hand in controlling the talent pipeline from coast to coast. His closest friend and eventual paramour however is Vonnie (Stewart) a comparatively down to earth secretary who would rather bask in the glow of the warm sun then in glitzy opulence. He idolizes her, pines for her despite her insistence that she has a boyfriend; an older man as we later find out.

Woody Allen himself provides the narration for this gentle nostalgia tour through Golden Age Hollywood. Much like his voice, the film feels warm, familiar if sadly slow and blunted. Lacking the consistently snappy tone of earlier works, Cafe Society leans a little too heavily on the love triangle, which granted, captures some excellent drama but is singed from overcooking. When we are rewarded with the usual delights of Allen's repertoire, it all comes out banal, like a list of axioms repeated one too many times.

Yet despite lacking the verbal excitement of Allen's prized filmography, Cafe Society more than delivers in gorgeous cinematography, characterization and themes which are glamorously brought to life by a talented cast. Steve Carell's natural amiability allows us to more easily welter in Phil's more unsavory character decisions which includes having his nephew wait in the waiting room of his office for weeks. He's an agent but he lacks the boorishness of Ari Gold. He believes in what he's selling, and given the way he name- drops by the poolside and the fondness industry insiders seem to have for him, you can tell he's good at what he does. Jesse Eisenberg brings the same frazzled nudnik buoyancy he previously brought to Allen's To Rome with Love (2012). It's easy to see why Eisenberg is a repeated player, the man brings all the trappings of Woody's old characters only with a slightly stronger edge.

If there's one standout however it would have to be Kristen Stewart who resists being the flavorless object of affection. Goodness knows it could have been easy given the time period of the film (not to mention her previous role in the Twilight Series (2008-2012)), but her strident autonomy keeps us invested. She's a piece of Citrine amid fool's gold, a girl next door above the ostentatiousness of industry fugazi. A girl to bring home to mamma.

Much of Bobby's character develops between the intoxicating glamour of Hollywood and the provocative corruptibility of New York City. The dichotomy has a night and day quality that is mirrored by the earthy Vonnie and the glittering Veronica (Lively) who appears later in the film. Large swaths of the movie take place in the Big Apple, much of which concentrates on the foibles of Bobby's sister (Lennick), brother-in-law (Kunken) and mobster brother (Stoll). Far from being unnecessary asides, these stories aptly meld into the film's large themes: love, respect and regret.

With the denseness of a novel and the light touch of Allen's finest, a question the emerges; what is the director trying to tell us through this story? Bobby's balance between the two cities he calls home, mimics Woody Allen's long, illustrious trajectory as a member of the New York intelligentsia and a Hollywood staple. Perhaps he's trying to tell us our problems may seem significant to us and every choice we make means another choice has been deferred, yet in the grand scheme of things, life is ultimately a comedy.

Beautiful but forgettable

[lewis-elizabeth123 · 7/10 · 29 July 2019]

This movie is beautiful. The shots are very well placed. The lighting and colour palettes were extremely appealing. The dialogue was quirky but fun to listen to. The acting is good, direction is good. However, most films with this topic base leave you either incredibly thoughtful, happy or sad. Maybe if you are experiencing similar things as the characters then you'll get more from this film. However, it mostly left me feeling incredibly empty and I'll possibly forget about it.

One of Woody's Worst

[Leafman · 3/10 · 30 July 2016]

Woody Allen cannot make a quality film every single year. He just can't. But even in his lesser efforts, the movie is always about something, whether it be a dramatic (or comedic) focus on damaged characters or maybe another of his many stabs at existentialism. In the case of "Café Society," I was confused about Woody's intent since the film is not funny, nor is it thought-provoking or really even entertaining.

True, we have Bobby (Jesse Eisenberg), another one of Allen's coming-of-age protagonists from New York who brings ‎his youthful naïveté to Hollywood of the 1930s. Bobby commands most of the screen time, but Allen did not infuse Bobby with any endearing or charismatic qualities.

For scene after scene, I found the character to be so bland and pointless that I could not root for him. Instead, we just wait for the next moment of plot to come dropping on the character's head while the new-found glamour of Hollywood surrounds him.

Further, Allen's scattershot script tries to include his oft-used device of a love triangle, and the one in this film is among his most muddled. We know that Bobby is the type who'll easily succumb to the charms/skirts of his Uncle Phil's secretary Vonnie (Kristen Stewart), and when we find out that Vonnie's boyfriend is really Uncle Phil himself (Steve Carell), we know someone's heart is going to broken by somebody in this trio.

But when Allen's script has Phil shifting his love from his wife to Vonnie, then from Vonnie back to his wife, then back to Vonnie again, we ask the question of ... why? It's not made clear to me. Consequently, it's a triangle where no one cares who's paired with who before long. And Carell's portrayal of Phil cannot make him a character we care about, as he is just as yawn-inducing as Bobby.

I also kept asking "why" when I saw the story abruptly changing focus to show us Bobby's brother Ben and his gangster ties in New York. In a curious plot deviation, we see Ben assisting with a murder plot of a mean-and-mad next-door neighbor to help two characters in the film, then later going to the electric chair for it. Again, the inclusion of this character felt so randomized, I kept wondering why we are supposed to care.

If there's a redeeming quality to this whole mess, it's the film's visual appeal. The costuming, the sets and the cinematography are all Oscar-worthy in their authenticity. Allen clearly was trying to make a piece of nostalgia here, and the LOOK of the film is simply breath-taking.

His other attempts to wax nostalgic just don't shine. Yes, we hear a parade of famous names, such as Joan Crawford, Paul Muni, Adolphe Menjou, and Barbara Stanwyck, but there's hardly anything substantive; as if sheer name-dropping by Allen would suffice to create a loving tribute to the 1930s.

Allen, at his worst, still makes films that try to do ... something. In other words, Allen does not seek to get rich off his movies by selling the masses the commercialized movie brainlessness that makes billions in box office sales. He genuinely tries to portray ideas, comedics or characters that are worthy of our attention.

That's why "Café Society" is completely baffling to me. I know Allen was trying to accomplish something. Very frequently, Woody is out to make a thought-provoking film, no doubt about it.

But I don't think the bewilderment that's plaguing my mind are the thoughts he wanted to provoke.

Woody Hanging On...But Mediocrity Doesn't Deserve a Place in the Allen Filmography

[LeonLouisRicci · 6/10 · 22 December 2017]

It's a Sad Thing, Growing Old, even when it is Relatively Painless. Our Heroes, or People We Greatly Admire Grow Old in a Spotlight. Fat Elvis, Mickey Mantle bringing His Lifetime Batting Average Below 300 because He Played so Ineffectually a couple of Seasons too long, just to Illustrate.

Woody Allen hasn't quite reached the Embarrassing Stage of Old Age, but the Signs are Signaling. Example, His usually Snappy, but Droll Narration is Audibly Atrophied. He just Sounds Old and Power Drained.

Also, the Recycling of Plot and People from Previous Works are Intruding Frequently in His Late Year Mediocrities. Allen may not be Obese like Elvis, and His Batting Average is Still Better than His Peers, but Life Expectancies Expect their Due. Here's Hope that Woody has the Wit and Inclination to Know when to give Us His Swan Song and Retire with Dignified Reluctance.

Woody Allen probably has at least One or Two Tricks remaining to work His Magic and Entertain His Legion of Admirers and Confound His Many Critics. Even Mickey Mantle Hit a Few Home Runs in those Subpar Seasons just before Hanging Up His Spikes.

Swing for the Fences Woody so We can Watch that Home Run Trot once more.

This isn't a Bad Film, its just too Mediocre for a Genius Superstar.

Untitled review about Woody Allen film

[jarrodmcdonald-1 · 27 December 2016]

I have several problems with this film (and there are things I do like about it too). In no specific order, what I don't like--too much name dropping. People in the 30s didn't talk that way. The film becomes some weird kind of encyclopedia about classic film stars. And sometimes Allen has to explain who they are. He has a character mention Bill Powell, then has the character clarify this means William Powell. Everyone in Hollywood at that time would know who Bill Powell was and probably nobody called him William Powell, except fans reading his billing on screen.

The name dropping is really a problem in the party scenes. The agent keeps saying Greta Garbo is somewhere, that Joan Blondell is floating around, but it's just names, we never see them. And these are supposed to be high-powered parties, where everyone would be in attendance. It's like Woody Allen is afraid to bring them on screen and present them as real characters, which just seems silly. Can you imagine if THE AVIATOR, a story about Howard Hughes, only mentioned Katharine Hepburn, Jean Harlow and Ava Gardner and never showed them? There are plenty of celebrity impersonators Allen could have hired for these scenes.

I think Woody's voice-over narration is-- I don't want to sound mean-- not very impressive. His voice is quite shaky. He should work with a therapist to strengthen his voice or else have someone else do the narration. It kept taking me out of the story.

There's no real chemistry between the actor who plays the uncle (Steve Carrell) and the girl (Kristen Stewart) he supposedly loves so passionately. I think a sexier actor should've been used instead of Carrell. Bruce Willis was originally hired for this role and left the project, but even he doesn't seem right. Meanwhile, it seemed unusual that she had a Masters Degree and she's working as a secretary to him. She didn't really come across as a very educated girl.

What I like-- Jeannie Berlin is great as the young guy's mother back in New York. Allen should have built the movie around her. Better yet, a new film should be made with her and Julie Kavner as sisters. That would be something.

Jesse Eisenberg is good as the young lovestruck protagonist, though I do think he's forcing some Allenesque mannerisms. I like the irony that the girl in Hollywood and the girl he ends up marrying in New York have the same first name (Veronica). But I don't think Blake Lively has chemistry with Eisenberg. It's kind of like putting a young Jane Seymour with a young Woody Allen, and that doesn't quite work.

The music is wonderful. Plus the costumes are fabulous, and so are the cars and hairstyles. But a clip of Barbara Stanwyck and Gene Raymond in a film glimpsed within the film (THE WOMAN IN RED) shows that women and men from that era actually dressed a bit differently. So basically CAFE SOCIETY is relying on stereotypes and manufactured memories about the 30s; thus, it is not too authentic.

Great acting

[hoogmeulen-08540 · 7/10 · 27 November 2021]

All movies with Kirsten Stewart are worth seeing. Even this one. Not Allen's best. The set decoration is outstanding.

The acting is how can be expected in an WA movie. He allows his actors do what they do best. Act. And in a WA movie lovers never live long and happy for the rest of their lives. Could have done with al little more ' pepper'.

Beautiful Visuals and Charming Performances!!

[li0904426 · 7/10 · 19 August 2023]

The movie "Café Society" is a romantic comedy-drama and it follows a young man who moves to Hollywood in the 1930s and falls in love with his uncle's assistant. Woody Allen has once again delivered an excellent plot with his signature ingredients: Jewish characters, the mob, family dynamics, infidelity, jazz music, and the glamorous underworld of Hollywood studios and New York bars.

The always-Italian Vittorio Storaro's stunning cinematography brings back the nostalgia of the 1930s. The movie's big surprise is two newcomers at the time: Jesse Eisenberg as Bobby and Kristen Stewart as Vonnie, who manage to convey all the chemistry of lovers in doubt.

The movie has its ups and downs, but it manages to keep the viewer engaged until the end. Allen skillfully avoids falling into the trap of predictable and clichéd endings that are common in other Hollywood movies.

A Woody Allen Trademark

[jaysanchu07 · 7/10 · 31 March 2023]

Cafe Society is a delightful piece of cinema that once again showcases Woody Allen's magic as a storyteller of tales that aims to please. As the credits roll, there is then a sense of whimsical longing for a piece of the Old Hollywood & Vintage New York depicted masterfully in this 2016 gem. From the stunning cinematography, the light hearted narration, the classical music that sets the mood and the mouth watering set pieces, Allen's choice of craft transports its audience & cements an enjoyable experience. The leads of Jesse Eisenberg, Steve Carrell & Kristen Stewart, adds a myriad of charm with their fantastic portrayals. And the wildly amusing & a tad inappropriate love story that entangles them, is something deeply yearned for & savored for its sweet bitterness.

Cafe Society then, is truly another magnificent effort from the master of nostalgic and pleasurable narratives. There is then no deep character studies nor thought provoking complexities here, only unassuming romantic exploits told with rich & beautiful backdrops that impresses.

That teardrop on the elegant profile

[An_American_in_Paris · 8/10 · 12 May 2016]

Woody Allen's latest, which opened yesterday in Paris and at the Cannes Festival, is a gentle and thoughtful examination of love. Jesse Eisenberg, best known for his portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Network, plays Bobby, a young New Yorker who heads out to Hollywood in search of an exciting future. He falls for Vonnie (Kristin Stewart of Twilight fame), the secretary of his Uncle Phil (Steve Carell), a successful producer, and is soon confronted with the fact that she has a mysterious lover. The resulting confusion is worthy of Allen's mentor, Anton Chekhov. In an interview in the French magazine l'Obs, Allen remembers his own experience in Hollywood, talking to a producer who cut him off to take a call from Fred Astaire. We soon meet all of the rest of Bobby's family, including a gangster brother and a sister who is married to an intellectual, who offers such wisdom as the quotation, "Live every day like it's your last and some day you'll be right." With brilliant cinematography by Vittorio Storaro and great performances from Eisenberg, Carell and Stewart, the film is one of Allen's most enjoyable in years. The poster features a stylized profile of a woman with a teardrop - love always includes an element of sadness, even as it brings laughter and self-realization. A French review of the Cannes opening compares Allen to Ernst Lubitsch, master of urbane comedies of manners in the 1930's.

Plot line from The Apartment

[Ollyda · 7/10 · 10 December 2016]

If like me you are a big fan of Billy Wilder's film The Apartment you might have noticed that the plot line during the first half of Café Society is identical. Jesse Eisenberg is trying to date a woman from work, Kristen Stewart, unaware that she is the girlfriend of his boss - in this case also his uncle. That relationship is also revealed to him using a similar device. I have to say that The Apartment is my favourite film but it's still nice to see the twist which Woody Allen puts on it at the end. Wilder's film has the famous happy ending with Jack Lemmon and Shirley Maclaine getting together. Even for fans like me this seems slightly improbable. Maybe that's part of the appeal. However Allen ends his film just as in the original with a New Year's Eve party (itself reminiscent of Radio Days) And he comments on, as he often does, the sadder, truer reality of life because Eisenberg and Stewart fail to get together, despite regrets. I wonder what Woody Allen actually thinks of The Apartment because there's an excerpt of an interview with Robert Weide on YouTube in which Allen names Some Like It Hot, the other famous Wilder/Lemmon film, as a classic he didn't like. Most if not all of Woody Allen's films are a play on some other classic film, theatrical drama or novel. I recall a quote from Isabella Rossellinii complaining about Allen lifting the plot of Sweet And Lowdown from Fellini's La Strada - as if it was a bad thing. To me, this form of borrowing simply gives an extra depth to his films that sometimes gets overlooked.

Nothing of interest on this Café's menu.

[writeguyr · 2/10 · 9 November 2016]

As a longtime fan of Woody Allen's films I find the difficult situation of writing about an Allen film that was sub-par by Allen's standards. "Café Society" is nothing more than a parade of celebrity big name stars dressing up in 1930's wardrobe, then parading in front of the camera. Delivering boring, dour and staid lines. This was a disconnected film that had no real strong story line. It is jumble of inept plots that are supposed to connect but just don't work here. One of Allen's worse screenplay's.

The weakest link in this film is Jesse Eisenberg as the lead character Bobby. A young man who travels to Hollywood in the 1930's to find himself and his future. Eisenberg has had much success as a teen film star and recently as Lex Luthor in "Batman vs Superman," he did not do a believable job with his portrayal of Luthor. Nor does he do a good job portraying Bobby. As Bobby he just meanders through scene after scene. Yet all I could see is the teen star Jesse. He didn't transform well into a 1930's young man. In fact the entire film seem outdated as the time line. This film would have been much better had it been placed in the present time. His costar and love interest Kristen Stewart as Vonnie, fared even worse. Her character was a weak link that just did not match well with Bobby. Eisenberg and Stewart had appeared together in "American Ultra" with Eisenberg as a stoner/hit-man and Stewart as his love interest. They worked well together in that action/comedy format. Yet in "Café Society" there is no real chemistry between Bobby and Vonnie in this film.

Bobby's uncle and super talent agent Phil Stern played by Steve Carell plays his character way too serious and is wasted in this film. He constantly drops big name stars of the 1930's. Yet we never see any of them on the screen in cameos played by actors in this film. That would have given this film some credibility. The character Ben Dorfman played by Corey Stoll is added to put some action humor in the film as a gangster thug of the 1930's but it just didn't add anything or help here.

The love interest between Bobby and Vonnie is played out similar to Alvy Singer and Annie Hall played by Woody Allen and Diane Keaton in the 1977 Academy Award winning film "Annie Hall". In that film Hall/Keaton wanted a career and life in L.A. while Alvy/Allen was a true New Yorker. Same scenario pops up here Vonnie is in Hollywood, while Bobby become a night club manager in New York. While the 1930's costumes and sets are impressive. It all just comes across like an elaborate 1930's costume party. I liked Allen's film "Radio Days" a lot better. It had much more heart, soul and humor. In that film Allen took us back to his early days as a kid during the 1940's. It worked great because Allen told us his story and it was a very interesting story. Yet the 1930' "Cafe Society" is not interesting at all and seems quite phony. The only bright spot in this entire film is the brief appearance by the hot sexy lovely Blake Lively as Veronica, she livens up this dull film, if only for a very brief time.

Nostalgic and elegant

[dierregi · 8/10 · 5 June 2016]

The plot of the latest Allen's movie is your basic love triangle, set in the 30s and with a small twist. Eisenberg and Stewart play the two young lovers, Bobby and Vonnie, who meet in Hollywood, where Bobby moved from New York.

Bobby's uncle, Phil, is a big shot in the movie industry and Bobby is looking for a job. Vonnie is Phil's secretary and part of her job is to make Bobby feel at home. After a few months, Bobby realizes is not happy on the West Coast, but he is in love with Vonnie.

Bobby proposes to Vonnie and asks her to move to New York with him. But she has a "secret" lover, who also proposes. Bobby moves back to New York alone, to work in his gangster's brother night club. The denouement of their love story is melancholic.

I am not a fan of Stewart, but her part required some aloofness and mystery and she did a good job - whether because she is a good actress or because her range is limited to playing cold and detached I cannot say. Also, the movie offers some classic Allen's punchlines, about life, its meaning or lack thereof. The voice-over did not disturbed me a bit and, as usual, the soundtrack is fabulous. Since I start to feel Allen's nostalgia for the past, this movie fulfilled all my expectations.

If you like Allen's movies, you will probably like this one, too. It is nostalgic but not sentimental and elegant in an old-fashioned way.

Woody lite?

[ricovegas · 6/10 · 22 May 2021]

While Cafe Society is certainly not in the category of Woody Allen classics, it is, none the less, an entertaining movie. It pretty much adheres to Allen's standard formula which is in of itself not such a bad idea. A lot of reviewers claim (rightly so) that it doesn't live up to Woody's best, so I tried to view this movie as if it were directed by someone other than Allen. Using that as my guideline, it seems as though this may have been a movie made by someone who is a big Allen fan and who was trying in some way to pay homage to Allen. That being said, the movie would definitely qualify as a success. So if you like Woody Allen movies, you may not be blown away, but, I believe you will be pleasantly surpised.

Flat Champagne

[ags123 · 3/10 · 30 September 2016]

This film ranks among the worst in Woody Allen's filmography. There are lots of things wrong with it. Casting, usually a strong-point in his films, is way off the mark. Jesse Eisenberg is the latest in a string of stand-ins for the Woody Allen part and he's as bad as Jason Biggs in "Anything Else." Besides weak acting skills he lacks the charisma to carry a film. After this second go-round with Allen (he appeared in "To Rome, With Love") let's hope he doesn't become an Allen regular. Kristen Stewart fares somewhat better, though she lacks the ditzy quality that Louise Lasser/Diane Keaton/Mia Farrow conveyed so well. Steve Carell overplays his part. It doesn't help that the characters are all so unlikeable. Allen's depiction of Jews here is not only unflattering but downright offensive. The effort to make this a seriocomic morality tale doesn't work. The jokes fall flat and the message is muddled. The whole thing left a sour taste.

Confused

[Chloe245 · 3 January 2019]

I'm confused if the husband character loved the wife as well as Veronica ? and if not why did he say to her he was in love with two people ? He says in the film he likes her a lot ? If he loves the wife is it as a friend or as another romantic love and what kind of romantic love ? And why did he stay with the wife if he was in love with Veronica ? He mentions 'but there's nothing wrong with her (the wife)' so was a reason or the reason him feeling he couldn't get a divorce because it was frowned upon ?